----------
I had a pleasant hour yesterday experimenting with the I-1 and its manual mode using my iPhone, learning how to make it work with SX-70 and 600 B&W film packs. The current generation B&W 600 is quite contrasty so you have to be careful of total dynamic range in your scene and using the flash for fill is important. Once you get the hang of it, you can get some very interesting results.

Impossible I-1
Impossible Yellow Duochrome film

I apologize for the model, but you work with what you have at hand. ;-)

I’m interested in the new I-1, but will stick with my SX-70, at least for now. The folks on the “Instant Photography Podcast” reviewed the camera last week and they all liked it, especially the build quality, light weight and the ring flash. Can you tell me more about cellphone app thing? Is it necessary for the camera’s operation? Or does it add additional features?

I’m interested in the new I-1, but will stick with my SX-70, at least for now. The folks on the “Instant Photography Podcast” reviewed the camera last week and they all liked it, especially the build quality, light weight and the ring flash. Can you tell me more about cellphone app thing? Is it necessary for the camera’s operation? Or does it add additional features?

I'm not giving up the SX-70 (and others) either. The I-1 is in addition.

The I-1 used by itself is complete: it's an autofocus, autoexposure camera that has the standard Polaroid automation overrides: fiash on or off, exposure +, normal, or minus.

The I-1 app on a smartphone nets you in addition:

Remote Release
Manual Mode - explicit control of focus, aperture, and shutter speed
Self Timer
Double Exposure
Release on Noise
Light Painting
Color Painting
Scanner (which includes a log of all the exposures made with the app that you can attach the images to)

The camera alone works very well. The camera + smartphone app work together very well. It's an excellent addition to the Polaroid instant camera world.

I've put 7 packs of film through the I-1 now and am beginning to get a good feel for both it and the films I currently have.

Of course, I now need to scan them all. Time to make a jig so that I can do it with the Leica SL (or the iPhone, for that matter!) quickly and consistently. Scanning with the flatbed scanner nets inconsistent results due to problems with Newton rings and such, and without a good jig to position the camera and print easily, using a copy stand isn't particularly consistent either. It also needs a cover glass to hold the prints properly flat when scanning.

Integral instant film is always full of challenges... I think they make it fun! :-)

I've put 7 packs of film through the I-1 now and am beginning to get a good feel for both it and the films I currently have.

Of course, I now need to scan them all. Time to make a jig so that I can do it with the Leica SL (or the iPhone, for that matter!) quickly and consistently. Scanning with the flatbed scanner nets inconsistent results due to problems with Newton rings and such, and without a good jig to position the camera and print easily, using a copy stand isn't particularly consistent either. It also needs a cover glass to hold the prints properly flat when scanning.

Integral instant film is always full of challenges... I think they make it fun! :-)

G

Interestingly, given the huge concern about newton rings I never encountered them with my V550. Often I procastinate the scanning and the Polaroids will "stabilize", I don't know if that allows for some kinking and no contact of photo and glass.

Integral film is fun as heck and quite a success. Today I shot a frame of a friend (not Polaroid generation) and he was amazed by it, that said, the SX70 itself gathers lots of interest!
Impossible/Polaroid has that classic touch.

I always try to keep a pack loaded in camera but adding up ends up taking wads of cash! 'Tis why I don't bring it around social events much... It's wonderful but I'd end broke.

I bought some of the new Color (3.0) but have yet to end the current BW pack. I don't know how much importance/hype they gave on past generation advancements but it's nice to have been released together (albeit not much mentioned about).
Seen results online that look very promising, and the guy at IP BCN told me that it was fantastic and very different from the past generation.

I only rarely see Newton rings if I use my HP Multifunction printer/scanner/fax machine, but it's only an 8bit scanner. I often see Newton rings with the same prints when using my Epson Perfection 2400 scanner. It must be something to do with the specific glass or acrylic used in the different scanners.

I had tested the new 600 Color v3.0 beta twice: one set of three packs around late Spring of last year, and another set of three packs from late November of last year. Even in beta, it is radically faster to process than the previous 600 Color and far better/more consistent in color tone. It is very close to the original Polaroid SX-70 color tones.

I've just ordered stock on the new packaging 600 Color, I-1 Color, and SX-70 Color. Impossible did a nice email broadcast about it a few days after the I-1 release announcements.

Instant film has always been pricier than regular film. With the I-1 films, the price difference is approximately double the cost per frame of shooting 6x6 format and having the film processed at a photofinisher. I try not to bankrupt myself with it, I go for it in bursts of usage now and then.

(I'd love to do some Impossible 8x10 format work, but it's just too expensive to acquire all the necessary hardware—camera, lens, film back, processing unit—and then pay $20 per photo on top of that.)

Godfrey, very much indeed! The Color pack (ordinary 2.0) I shot last month was nice, but mine was rather yellow maybe due to the heat around here. Also it is emergence time-development, rather slow. This made me put the frames in a pocket or bag to shield and wait.

The quickness of BW is amazing, and quite a part of the moment. Just seeing it emerge slow and steady is wonderful. People always comment about the, "Oh, it's B&W" though.

Incredibly it's been quite a few years since they began their venture, and how far its gotten. That the new color may rival the original Polaroid is fantastic, perhaps emergence is still slow compared to Original Polaroid, but but but it seems great.

I do have a plan when I'm a millionaire Not many concerns about the price then.

...
Incredibly it's been quite a few years since they began their venture, and how far its gotten. That the new color may rival the original Polaroid is fantastic, perhaps emergence is still slow compared to Original Polaroid, but it seems great.
...

I dunno. Five to six years of development; hmm, I'm reluctant to call that "quite a few years".

Impossible has made very good progress, considering—Polaroid put at least a decade in before releasing a product and probably a billion dollars or so. Impossible knew it could be done and had the processing machinery at hand, but they had to figure out the chemistry all over again, from scratch. That they're this close to replicating Polaroid's product in just six years on the shoestring budget they've got says good stuff for them.

With the v3 color, I see images begin to emerge in about four minutes and render to near finish quality in about an hour. That's not too far off what Polaroid film did.

BTW: First time charging took a couple hours with my iPad 12W USB charger. Since then, I've charged it up when I got down to four lights on battery check two times and it's seemed to do the job much faster.

(From fully charged, it seems that three to four packs down to one light left on is possible. Probably a bit less if you're using the control app and Bluetooth a lot.)

how's this compared to instax other than film size? Not sure I can justify double the cost for just fun camera.

There's an utterly different visual feel to Impossible instant film compared to Instax. Instax is striving to be a standard medium for the 95th percentile snapshot. Impossible's film is moving in that direction quality-wise, but has been more narrowly focused on the 'more art oriented' side of photographic endeavor.

There's an utterly different visual feel to Impossible instant film compared to Instax. Instax is striving to be a standard medium for the 95th percentile snapshot. Impossible's film is moving in that direction quality-wise, but has been more narrowly focused on the 'more art oriented' side of photographic endeavor.

G

From what I see it wants to be the Lomo of instant photography. There is nothing that says you cannot make "art oriented" photography with instax. However if I see this, then you simply cannot make a decent photo with Impossible. I'm really disappointed.

All respect for them, what they try is a gigantic project. But after all those years I ask myself was it all worth it? This doesn't want me to ruch out and get that film however sexy the camera looks.

From what I see it wants to be the Lomo of instant photography. There is nothing that says you cannot make "art oriented" photography with instax. However if I see this, then you simply cannot make a decent photo with Impossible. I'm really disappointed.

All respect for them, what they try is a gigantic project. But after all those years I ask myself was it all worth it? This doesn't want me to ruch out and get that film however sexy the camera looks.

You mean nice standard snapshots like this?

Impossible I-1
Impossible 600 Color v3 beta 2

Very easy, just depends on what film you choose.

You don't get any choices in Instax film. You're not going to get cyanograph, magenta, yellow duotone, green duotone, etc etc.

Don't judge without understanding what Impossible is offering, or what you are seeing. I've been playing with outdated, older, and effects films because I like the effects. If you stick to current production, non-expired, non-beta materials, you get high-quality standard results.

Nice Godfrey, maybe you should right the manual. I wonder how many I-1s there are out there?

thanks!

Little need to write a manual... The manual that came with the camera is pretty solid. The I-1 app documentation is built-in and it works pretty well for a v1.0 app, although I hope for some improvements and additional features in the manual mode operation.

A corner in my apartment, photo taken by my wife (again!), full auto exposure.
One of the reason for which I bough this camera is that I wanted to support the Impossible Project, what they did is stunning...
robert

__________________Remember: today is the Day !from Ruth Bernhard recipe for a long and happy life

I like contrast in B&W, the only point I would like the possibility to give less power to the flash when doing portraits at short distance. I took one head and shoulder of my wife and her face is blown out, almost white!
Maybe with the app it's possible to do it, not yet explored...

robert

__________________Remember: today is the Day !from Ruth Bernhard recipe for a long and happy life

..
I like contrast in B&W, the only point I would like the possibility to give less power to the flash when doing portraits at short distance. I took one head and shoulder of my wife and her face is blown out, almost white!
Maybe with the app it's possible to do it, not yet explored...

I've had the same issue ... At head and shoulder distance, you're too close for the flash with the 600 B&W film.

With the app and manual mode, you can control the flash output in four steps: off, low, mid, full. What that translates to in practical terms I haven't experimented with just yet.

Contrasty B&W is good, but the B&W 2.0 formulation is harsh enough to net very little latitude. I'd like a little more*mid-tone range to work with that would give about a stop more latitude.

You don't get any choices in Instax film. You're not going to get cyanograph, magenta, yellow duotone, green duotone, etc etc.

Don't judge without understanding what Impossible is offering, or what you are seeing. I've been playing with outdated, older, and effects films because I like the effects. If you stick to current production, non-expired, non-beta materials, you get high-quality standard results.

G

Much more what I would expect of a film. Might get a pack of that for the 5000. Problem is that they make more noise about the specials than simple standard film.

That Falafel shot looks fantastic. The color! Also, it's having the finesse of shooting under the best environment.
Shade, that is.
Summer's coming and over here it's brutal sun and strong heat, uh oh, time to practice shielding technique and ice cooler carry. That and train my relunctant and hard to catch friend to model. Guy's too photogenic for a single frame.

Shielding I try to do the first seconds and wait until having some emergence. Then it's hard to dismiss seeing the magic.

BTW I'll have to redirect myself to an SX70 thread, given I'm all in on the film but not yet the i1 The slower 100 film makes me suffer under shade.

Thanks! Yes, the 600 Color v3 is very good indeed. Shooting these cameras brings me back to all the limitations of shooting film from the past ... Easy to forget when you shoot with a modern camera all the time. Exercising my skills within the film's limitations help improve my work when I pick up the Leica SL or M-P again. It keeps me aware of what I'm doing.

The new films are significantly less light sensitive coming out of the camera, which helps a lot. The I-1 has a full frog-tongue built in so auto-shields the film, but I nip the prints into my bag quickly anyway for the first few minutes.

I'm shooting the SX-70 less since I got the SLR670a (uses 600 film). But the SX-70 film works better in the SLR670m and 66/6 Instant Pinhole ... less reciprocity effect for long manual exposures (and of course, the SLR670m's autoexposure is set up for SX-70 film). So I keep some stock of SX-70 film around, primarily B&W at present but I will get some of the new color for those cameras soon.

I tried another setup for capturing the instant film prints using the Leica SL, 60mm macro, etc. Modestly successful ... decent quality, and reasonably quick. I need to actually build a proper jig, though, along with the right lighting for best evenness in capture. The little buggers are a pain to scan or photograph because of the glossy acrylic cover sheet.

Flatbed scans have proved no problem to me at the moment, but as I have to fire up the rig it is the most inconvenient and I tend to procastinate.

Also, some frames that are to be given when shot with people have no chance to be scanned at home. With some friends I take it for scan and then give it to them later, but sometimes not.
The iPhone app is a decent quick&dirty option and using it indoors together with a darkslide to mitigate some reflections gives an ok result. But yes, the glossy surface shines its best when photographed (pun intended).

My best quick&dirty seems to be to use the HP multifunction scanner/printer/fax gizmo and set it to 1200 ppi. It seems to cause Newton rings far less than the Epson 2400, even if it doesn't support the full 16bit color depth the results are good. But it's very slow compared to capturing with the copy camera approach ... I was able to capture about 250 exposures of backlog in an hour or so on Saturday with the SL, the same would take me days with a flatbed scanner. Luckily I rarely shoot in such volumes (or I'd go broke...). ;-)

Frames going to friends I just shoot two and keep one. Makes it much easier to deal with.

From what I see it wants to be the Lomo of instant photography. There is nothing that says you cannot make "art oriented" photography with instax. However if I see this, then you simply cannot make a decent photo with Impossible. I'm really disappointed.

I'm w/ Spanik. These frankly , apart from the B&W, look awful. And the falafal shot - that is awful too and that is meant to be the shot that is meant to demonstrate a control? It's washed out and blurry.
My Instax produces such better shots it's not even funny. And I didn't think those were particularly good!
It's interesting when a camera cannot produce technically decent results the excuse is given that it's actually artistic. It's not, and here's why. Art is not created by the tool, but by the user. Otherwise one could argue that all it takes to make an artist is to pick up one of these cameras. Because every shot will be blurry, out of focus, washed out. Which means it's art...

I am not anti Impossible project. I want them to succeed but praising it so far is like telling your kid he's done so well for his 8th place medal. I have an SX70 and a packet of Impossible Project B&W film so I am an Impossible Project customer, and I'm hoping that I can get something cool out of that. The only shots that I liked above were those taken w/ the B&W film.

I am not anti Impossible project. I want them to succeed but praising it so far is like telling your kid he's done so well for his 8th place medal. I have an SX70 and a packet of Impossible Project B&W film so I am an Impossible Project customer, and I'm hoping that I can get something cool out of that. The only shots that I liked above were those taken w/ the B&W film.

Yes, I applaud Impossible's achievements too, but the results, apart from the SX70 perhaps, remain very 'lomographic'.

Unless quality gets drastically better and prices lower, Impossible is not for me. Mind you, this is MY opinion and you may have yours.

As much as I'd like to support Impossible (I bought a refurbished Pola and I have some packs of film now), I can't just do it now.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.